pre-ground coffee

The question is...why were you drinking pre-ground coffee in the first place?

I've never seen a grocery store that sold whole-bean coffee that didn't have a grinder right next to it...

Pre-Ground Coffee, What is it? I never heard of this.

Let me be more specific...are we talking about the difference between folgers/maxwell house buckets'o'grounds or the stuff that comes in a bag like unground coffee (or like the bags you can fill yourself) but happen to have been ground for you. In the case of the latter, then it is not a big deal on a non-connoisseur level and is a vast improvement over a can of folgers.

I think there's a need to differentiate "instant coffee" like Maxwell House, and ground coffee.

Link no workie

It hasn't hurt me; I think I'll continue to drink Folgers just cause it is rediculously cheap, and..........I can't tell the difference between that and better coffee.

i drink ground coffee all the time.
i do not disagree that whole bean coffee you grind yourself might be so much better or makes one a more knowledgeable, non ignorant coffee connoiseur,
but i just have no time and no interest in taking it to that level.

Starbucks new pre ground coffee is good, but is about as expensive as their regular drip coffee.

You probably felt the same way about shoes, once upon a time.

In fact, there is a scene from the new Star Trek movie where they say, "Surprise! Those aren't dilithium crystals, they're Folger's crystals!"

I open up this thread soon after making a latte out of a brick of the espresso you get from the Latino markets. Thanks for that Robbie.

So because you don't know/care about coffee, the cheapest, crappiest coffee will do.

Lots of us purchase things we don't care about, where the absolute cheapest item/service will suffice. By spending less on stuff we don't care about, we have more money for the things we do care about.

But you're arguing that we should buy American-made good/services, even when a lower-priced import is available, as a way to "protect" jobs.

If I pay $10 for a Item X, an American-made item I don't care about, when its imported equivalent cost $5, I have $5 less to spend on Item Y, an item I do care about.

Reduced sales of Item Y hurts the maker/seller of that item. Which will reduce employment in the Item Y industry.

Isn't employment and social welfare maximized by pursuing policies where consumers are free to spend as little as possible on stuff they don't care about so they have as much money as possible leftover to purchase stuff they do care about?

So you want to protect employment in the Item X industry even if that means hurting employment in the Item Y industry (net effect on jobs to be determined)?

Of course, the higher prices for Item X means sales of that item are lower than they would be if the cheap import were available. Which, depending on what Item X is, could have really bad employment effects.

Maybe, Robbie, if you drank more coffee, you wouldn't sleep through econ class.